The Representation of Antichrist in Hildegard of Bingen`s Scivias

The Representation of Antichrist in Hildegard of Bingen`s Scivias

The Representation of Antichrist in Hildegard of Bingen's Scivias: Image, Word,
Commentary, and Visionary Experience
Author(s): Richard K. Emmerson
Source: Gesta, Vol. 41, No. 2 (2002), pp. 95-110
Published by: International Center of Medieval Art
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4126576
Accessed: 15/06/2010 18:16
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=icma.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
International Center of Medieval Art is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Gesta.
http://www.jstor.org
The Representation of Antichrist in Hildegard of
Bingen's Scivias: Image, Word, Commentary, and
Visionary Experience*
RICHARD K. EMMERSON
MedievalAcademy of America
Cambridge,Massachusetts
Abstract
Drawing on inherited traditional symbolism, apocalyptic
iconography, and monastic exegesis, this essay explores how
the representation of the Vision of the Last Days in Hildegard's Scivias, and, in particular, the image of Antichrist,
may have been understood by Hildegard, her monastic magister, Volmar, and other members of her earliest audience.
Focusing on the miniature included in the lost Rupertsberg
manuscript of Scivias as the best witness to Hildegard's original designs, the essay argues that the vision, its visual rendering, Hildegard's description of it, and the commentary on
it spoken by the Voicefrom Heaven are qualitatively and temporally distinct aspects of Hildegard's visionary experience.
In a concluding analysis, the frontispiece of the Rupertsberg
manuscript, which depicts Hildegard in vision, is shown to
distinguish four stages in her visionary experience.
Scivias by Hildegard of Bingen (1098-1179) is the
source of one of the most startlingand daring images of Antichrist in medieval art (Fig. 1; Color Plate 1). A tripartiteminiaturerepresenting an apocalyptic nightmare,it visualizes the
seer's vision of the Last Days (Scivias 3.11).1 According to
Hildegard, Scivias originated in 1141 when, at the age of
forty-two, she was instructed by a Voice from Heaven to
record the prophetic visions she had experienced since childhood (60). Receiving first the support of her monastic magister, Volmar (d. 1173), and then-according to medieval
tradition-the encouragement of the most respected mystic
of her time, Bernard of Clairvaux (1090-1153), as well as
the endorsement of Pope Eugenius III at the Synod of Trier
(1147/48), Hildegard completed Scivias in 1151.2 It is the
first of three remarkablevisionary works, which also include
her Liber vitae meritorum (1158-63) and her Liber divinorum operum (1163-74). The subject of much recent scholarship, Hildegard, as Peter Dronke writes, "still confronts us,
after eight centuries, as an overpowering, electrifying presence-and in many ways an enigmatic one."3 An excellent
example of the electrifying and enigmatic nature of Hildegard's work is her vision of the Last Days, which fuses the
prophet's personal experience with a deep understandingof
monastic theology. The result is a uniquely imaginative repre-
GESTAXLI/2 @ The International Center of Medieval Art 2002
sentationof the events Hildegardexpected to precede the Last
Judgment.
The image that is the subject of this essay is one of thirtyfive miniatures that once illuminated the lost Rupertsberg
manuscript (Wiesbaden, Hessisches Landesbibl., MS 1, ca.
1165-75), a deluxe copy of Scivias.4 In an ill-fated attemptto
protect the manuscript,it was taken in 1945 to Dresden, where
it disappeared.Fortunately,black-and-whitephotographsof its
images had been publishedearlier,and between 1927 and 1933
the nuns of Eibingen had prepareda facsimile, including color
copies of its miniatures.5The extent to which Hildegard was
responsible for the miniatures in the lost manuscript-which
was the culminationof a process thatbegan with the visions in
1141 and continued through their inscription, authorization,
and circulationin subsequent decades-is a matter of debate.
Some art historiansdistance Hildegardfrom the productionof
the miniatures,whereas others credit her with their inspiration,
design, and even execution.6 Without furtherdirect evidence,
the issue must remain a matter of speculation. Nevertheless,
given Hildegard'svigorous personal attentionto all she set out
to accomplish,it is reasonableto assume that she supervisedthe
productionof the luxurymanuscript,which was probablymade
at Rupertsbergduringher lifetime.7
Recently Madeline Caviness has made a persuasive case
for Hildegard being the ultimate source and designer of the
miniatures,suggesting that duringher visions she sketched designs on wax tablets "of the kind she drew in her self-portraitat
the opening of the book" and that these designs were later redrawn onto "single parchmentleaves."8As I will argue below
when discussing the manuscript'sfrontispiece (fol. 1; Fig. 8),
designs on wax tablets were most likely the means by which she
first recordedher visionary experience. It remainsunclearhow
these designs were transmittedduring the years between the
time Hildegard experienced and recorded her visions and the
time she prepared her commentaries on them in Scivias, or
how the designs were then transmittedduring the additional
ten to twenty-five years between the completion of Scivias
and the productionof the Rupertsbergmanuscriptand its miniatures. Nevertheless, I agree with Caviness that the images
"are so close to the text in spirit (but not in the literal way that
95
FIGURE 1. Hildegard, Scivias, 3.11, Eibingen, MS 1, fol. 214v (copy of Wiesbaden, Hessisches
Landesbibliothek,MS 1), Vision of the Last Days (photo: after Scivias, CCCM43A, by permission
of Brepols Publishers).
illustrations depend on the word for their genesis) that the
compositions must have come from the visionary'sown stylus
and should therefore be given the same status as her verbal
or musical compositions."9This study will therefore treat the
miniaturesas informed and informative visual representations
of Hildegard'svisionary experience. They are primaryrepresentations of what Hildegardsaw, which precede in time and,
I will argue,in importancethe transcriptionsof the Voice from
Heaven that offer comment on her visions throughoutScivias.
The miniature of the Last Days that is the focus of this
study (fol. 214v) provides a means for exploring Hildegard's
apocalypticism precisely because Hildegard privileged the
visual over the verbal in describing her visionary experience.10 Although Hildegard was clearly learned in monastic
96
book culture, as will be demonstratedbelow, she understood
the importance of her visions to lie in their status as visual
phenomena, a point she emphasized in her letter to Guibertof
Gembloux: "But what I do not see I do not know, for I am not
learned.""'Thus this essay will first analyze the miniature
that provided visual representation of the vision of the Last
Days in the Rupertsbergmanuscript.Although the miniature
was painted many years after Hildegard experienced her
vision, it provides the best visual evidence of her original
renderingof the vision, which can be compared with her verbal description of what she saw. Analysis will focus on how
Hildegard's immediate circle might have responded to the
image as a visual simulation of a vision and particularly to
her novel representationof Antichrist, which may have been
troubling for her first audience and encouraged the interpretations and extensive explanations she would include in her
commentary.The essay will then explore the exegetical context of the vision, examining the extent to which the commentary that accompanies the image and description of the
vision in Scivias developed traditional eschatological expectations evident in monastic thought. Finally, it will suggest
how the vision and its visual and verbal representationsprovide insights into the status and order of Hildegard'svisionary experience.
Hildegard's Vision of the Last Days
One way to approachthe pictorial representationof the
vision and its verbal counterpartis to consider what someone
like Volmar, Hildegard's secretary and spiritual advisor,
might have made of its imagery before the commentary had
been composed. We know from Hildegard that she first
confided in Volmar and that, once he had overcome his initial
astonishment and received the approval of his abbot, he was
the first to urge her to record her visions.12 What about the
vision might Volmar, his abbot, and other contemporaries
trained in monastic exegesis and apocalyptic thought recognize, and what might seem foreign or enigmatic, requiring
explanation? As Bernard McGinn has noted, "In its Latin
expression and salvation-historicalemphasis,"Hildegard'stheology "can be seen as a variant of medieval monastic theology, one in which Hildegard'svisions serve as the base text,
a new visionary scripture,for her theological exegesis."13An
awareness of monastic eschatology and traditional expectations regarding Antichrist can thus provide clues to the
earliest reception of Hildegard's visionary text.14 Similarly,
knowledge of iconographic sources and visual analogues can
help to contextualize the initial response to the design that
provided a visual approximation of her vision of the Last
Days. Although Hildegard's visions are genuinely unique,
their visualization could not entirely escape the influence of
contemporary pictorial conventions any more than her description of her experience could escape traditionalmodes of
expression.
Some components of the vision rely on an inherited
symbolism. As the vision opens, for example, Hildegard sees
five colorful beasts in the North tied by ropes to a mountain
in the West:
Then I looked to the North, and behold! five beasts stood
there. One was like a dog, fiery but not burning; another
was like a yellow lion; another was like a pale horse;
anotherlike a black pig; and the last like a gray wolf. And
they were facing the West. And in the West, before those
beasts, a hill with five peaks appeared; and from the
mouth of each beast one rope stretchedto one of the peaks
of the hill. All the ropes were black except the one that
came from the mouth of the wolf, which was partly black
and partly white (493).
The geographical directions Hildegard specifies in her
vision may be interpreted with reference to traditional symbolism as well as to the conventions established by her other
visions. First, Hildegard looks to the North, which suggests
that her vision will be a revelation dealing with evil, since
North in Indo-European folklore as well as Christian symbolism is the direction from which evil arises, the dwelling
place of enemies, demons, and giants, and the location of
hell.15 Images in Scivias usually picture North on the upper
left,16 so the visual and verbal representations of the vision
reinforced each other. But in the upper left quadrantthe miniature also portrays the mountain to which the beasts are
tied in the West, which is again appropriate, since West is
the apocalyptic direction, often associated with the Last
Judgment.17
The five beasts in the North tied to the mountain in the
West would thus have carried both evil and apocalyptic associations. The third beast, the pale horse (equus pallidus),
would more specifically have brought to mind the fourth
horseman of the Apocalypse, identified as Death riding a pale
horse, followed by Hell (Rev. 6:8). But the symbolic meaning
of the other beasts, their species and colors, could not be
determined solely by the visual evidence or Hildegard's visionary description. It is unlikely that members of her first
audience would immediately recognize them or identify what
they signify: they would later need to be explicated by the
Voice from Heaven (Scivias 3.11.1-6). The beasts, nevertheless, would be readily understood in a more general sense as
apocalyptic symbols, for they recall the many creatures that
populate biblical prophecies regarding the Last Days, particularly Daniel and the Apocalypse. In addition to being
symbols of evil, beasts in apocalyptic texts often symbolize
future events, kingdoms, or ages. According to Jerome's
widely known commentary on Daniel, the beasts in Daniel 7,
for example, symbolize the four ancient empires, ranging historically from Babylon to Rome, that will be followed in the
future by Antichrist's reign of evil established at the end of
time.18McGinn has noted the originality of Hildegard'sfiveage scheme of the Last Days, and her choice of these particular five beasts is definitely unusual.19 Yet those of Hildegard's
community who knew Jerome'sexegesis and traditionalapocalyptic symbolism would have been prepared to interpret the
five beasts of her vision as temporalsigns, symbols of consecutive ages or powers of evil. This interpretationwould later be
made explicit in the commentarythat Hildegardreceived from
the Voice of God (Scivias 3.11.1).
Hildegard also looks to the East, where she sees a Youth
whom she had seen in a previous vision seated at the eastern
corner of a building:
And lo, in the East I saw again that youth whom I had first
seen on the corner of the wall of the building where the
shining and stone parts came together, clad in a purple
tunic. I now saw him on the same corner, but now I could
see him from the waist down. And from the waist down to
97
the place that denotes the male he glowed like the dawn,
and there a harp was lying with its strings across his body;
and from there to the width of two fingers above his heel
he was in shadow, but from there down to the bottom of
the feet he was whiter than milk (493).
The vision describes the Youth as sitting on the eastern corner
of the building, recalling the cornerstone named in Psalms
117:22.20This figure could be interpretedintervisually with
reference to an earlier image (fol. 130v; Fig. 2), where his
cross nimbus reveals him to be Christ, an identification made
explicit in the commentary(Scivias 3.2.6). Hildegard'sapocalyptic vision (Fig. 1) again places the Youth in the East,
which is associated ecclesiastically with the church altar and
symbolically with Jerusalem, the source of truth. He thus
geographically balances the five beasts portrayed in the
North and West, just as in the apocalyptic scenario he morally balances their evil with good. To stress this moral and
geographic balance, the image echoes the earlier miniature,
again picturing the shining and stone parts of the wall but
also now showing the brightness of the Youth's torso and
white feet.21 The bright dawn of the Youth's waist and the
shadow across his loins at "the place that denotes the male"
and below imply again a dualistic contrast between good and
evil. Read temporally,it suggests thatthe brightnessof Christ's
church will be overcome by the shadow of evil, at least for a
short period of time. This use of dark and light symbolism
would also have helped Hildegard'sfirst audience understand
the ropes that tie the five beasts to the mountain in the West.
Unlike the black ropes of the first four beasts, the rope of the
fifth beast is white and black, a feature clearly illustrated in
the miniature. This mixture suggests that the gray wolf symbolically mixes elements of good and evil.
The first part of the vision, portrayed in the upper third
of the miniature, would thus probably have suggested the following to Hildegard'soriginal monastic audience. The beasts
represent ages or periods of history, perhaps church history,
given their connection to the Youth who serves as the foundation of the Church.The Youth is almost totally good, but he
is enshadowed by a darkness suggesting evil or tribulation,
even if in a small way or for a short period; at the same time,
the beasts represent ages that are almost totally evil, but the
gray wolf, tied to the mountain by a white and black rope,
implies an age that mixes at least some hope for good with
its evil. So much would be reasonably clear and accessible,
even without the seer's explication, which, as I will argue below, may have been composed to explain the vision's complex
imagery some time after the visionary experience was first
sketched and recorded.
The next scene Hildegard sees in vision is picturedin the
lower two-thirds of the miniature (Fig. 1). Its focus is a large
Woman who is so tall that her crown touches the frame
separating the upper and lower registers. This figure can be
interpreted intervisually, in accord with Hildegard's vision:
98
"And I saw again the figure of a woman whom I had previously seen in front of the altar that stands before the eyes
of God; she stood in the same place, but now I saw her from
the waist down" (493). Hildegard here alludes to Scivias 2.3,
in which she had described a magnificent Woman standing
before the altar of Christ: "After this I saw the image of a
woman as large as a great city, with a wonderful crown on her
head and arms from which a splendor hung like sleeves, shining from Heaven to earth"(169). This earlier vision is clearly
the point of reference for the large crowned Woman whom
Hildegard sees in her apocalyptic vision, and details of its
illustration (fol. 51; Fig. 3)22 are incorporatedinto the apocalyptic miniature.
The iconography of the Woman, although once again
unusual, would not have been difficult to decipher, since
phrases in the earlier vision associate her with traditional
symbols of Holy Church: "And that image spreads out its
splendor like a garment, saying, 'I must conceive and give
birth!'" (169). This readiness to give birth recalls the central
symbol of the Apocalypse, the mulier amicta sole, described
as "clothed with the sun, and the moon was under her feet,
and upon her head a crown of twelve stars"(Rev. 12:1). Pregnant and harassed by the Dragon (Rev. 12:2-3), she is often
identified as Ecclesia. Her iconography, furthermore, was
well established by the twelfth century, for she played a central role in the long tradition of Apocalypse illustration,
ranging from the earlier illuminated commentaries of the
eighth-century Spanish monk, Beatus of Li6bana, to the later
Anglo-French Apocalypses.24Typical of this iconography is
the representation of the Apocalyptic Woman in the Liber
floridus (Fig. 4), a spiritualencyclopedia written around1120
by Hildegard's near contemporary, Lambert of St.-Omer.25
The Woman holds her new-born son, who is caught up to
heaven (Rev. 12:5), and she is harassed by the red Dragon
with seven heads and ten horns, who is identified in the biblical text as Satan (Rev. 12:9).
Hildegard's Antichrist
Though Hildegard's Ecclesia recalls a well-established
apocalyptic tradition, the depiction in the Scivias vision of
the Last Days (Fig. 1) differs in one crucial respect from that
traditional iconography, and this difference is Hildegard's
most original and startlingcontributionto medieval eschatology. As demonstratedby the Liberfloridus image (Fig. 4), the
Apocalyptic Woman was usually shown being attackedby an
outside force, the Dragon, which symbolizes the devil, sometimes Antichrist, or, in the polemics of the later Middle Ages,
some other power such as a counterfeit pope, the German
emperor, or the Saracens.26This is true, for example, in the
spiritual encyclopedia compiled by Herrad of Hohenbourg,
a German abbess contemporary with Hildegard.27An enormous and complex volume intended for the instruction of
Herrad'snuns, the Hortus deliciarum (ca. 1176-96) includes
FIGURE 2. Hildegard, Scivias, 3.2, Eibingen, MS 1, fol. 130v (copy of
Wiesbaden,Hessisches Landesbibliothek,MS 1), Vision of the Youthand the
four-sided building (photo: after Scivias, CCCM 43A, by permission of
Brepols Publishers).
FIGURE 3. Hildegard, Scivias, 2.3, Eibingen, MS 1, fol. 51 (copy of Wiesbaden, Hessisches Landesbibliothek,MS 1), Vision of the Womanbefore the
altar of Christ (photo: after Scivias, CCCM43A, by permission of Brepols
Publishers).
an image of the Apocalyptic Woman (Fig. 5) that shows her
attacked not only on the right by the Dragon of Revelation
12, but also on the left by the cruel seven-headed Beast of
Revelation 13, which rises from the sea to wield a sword
against the faithful. Receiving its authority from the Dragon
(Rev. 13:4), the Sea Beast in monastic exegesis symbolizes
Antichrist.28Herrad'sHortus, like Hildegard'sScivias, was a
casualty of war, destroyed during the bombing of Strasbourg
in 1870. Luckily, earlier nineteenth-centurystudies included
some handcolored copies and drawings of the manuscript's
miniatures, so we can be confident that this image is close to
Herrad'soriginal and that it, like the illuminated Apocalypses, stresses Ecclesia's purity and bodily wholesomeness and
identifies the source of the attack on her as external rather
than internal.
In contrastto Herrad'simage, the illustration in the Liber
floridus, and all other medieval depictions of the apocalyptic
Woman, Hildegard's vision makes clear-both verbally as
described by the seer and visually as representedby the miniature (Fig. 1)-that Ecclesia is not attackedfrom the outside.
Instead, she is herself corrupt, especially at "the place that
denotes the female": "Andfrom her waist to the place that denotes the female, she had various scaly blemishes; and in that
latter place was a black and monstrous head. It had fiery eyes,
and ears like an ass', and nostrils and mouth like a lion's; it
opened wide its jowls and terribly clashed its horrible ironcolored teeth" (493). Some visual clues might have helped
Hildegard'searliest audience to interpretthis "black and monstrous head." The miniature finds a parallel in the image of
the Youth symbolizing Christ as the foundation of the Church
(Fig. 2) and also in the image illustrating the earlier vision of
Ecclesia (Fig. 3). Like the Youth, who is described in positive terms but is said to be overcome by a shadow (umbrosus), the Woman is presented as basically good but suffering
from a horrible evil, represented by the scaly blemishes and
the black head. The locus of both points of evil, furthermore,
is the same: the genitalia, whether male or female. This
brings to mind the visual motif in the lower right quadrantof
the miniature of Ecclesia, which shows black children entering the womb of the Church through a series of openings.
Just as the shadow marring the Youth is limited, so are
the blemishes of the Woman: "And from this head down to
her knees, the figure was white and red as if bruised by many
beatings; and from her knees to her tendons where they
joined her heels, which appearedwhite, she was covered with
blood" (493). The blood on her legs suggests tremendous
suffering, presumably caused by the monstrous head.29The
whiteness of the Woman'sfeet, therefore, comes as an unexpected contrast, promising that Ecclesia is ultimately good.
Since the vision is introduced by the five beasts that would
likely have been associated with temporal ages, Hildegard's
audience may also have understood the change from good to
evil and again to good as consecutive periods in ecclesiastical
history.30 This would suggest that, although Ecclesia will
99
FIGURE4. Lambertof St.-Omer,Liberfloridus,Wolfenbiittel,Herzog-AugustBibliothek, Guelf 1. Gud. Lat. 2, fol. 14v, Apocalyptic Womanattacked by
the Dragon (photo: Herzog-August-Bibliothek).
FIGURE5. Herrad of Hohenbourg, Hortus deliciarum,formerly Strasbourg,
Bibliothkquemunicipale,fol. 261v, Apocalyptic Woman(photo: after StraubKeller, Hortus deliciarum, 1879-99).
experience a time of evil and suffering (the Youth's shadow,
the Woman'smonstrous head, the bloody legs), ultimately it
will enjoy a period of goodness, perhaps at the end of time,
as symbolized by the white feet of both the Youth and the
Woman.
Hildegard's first audience, responding to the image and
description of the Woman'smonstrous genital head, may not
have recognized the source of evil plaguing Ecclesia, since
Hildegard does not identify it as Antichrist in her account of
the vision. The image, furthermore,is unusual: the last great
persecutor of the Churchis usually portrayedin medieval art
and exegesis as a human figure ratherthan as a demon.31But
a clue to this reading was provided by two furtherdepictions
of the monstrous head, one above a mountain pictured in the
lower register to the right of the Woman and one partially
obscured at the base of the mountain. Hildegard describes
what she saw, as the head attemptsto ascend to heaven: "And
behold! That monstrous head moved from its place with such
a great shock that the figure of the woman was shaken
throughall her limbs. And a great mass of excrement adhered
to the head; and it raised itself up upon a mountain and tried
to ascend the height of Heaven" (493). According to apocalyptic tradition, the final way Antichrist will deceptively
imitate Christ'slife will be by attempting to rise to heaven in
a parody of, the Ascension. This expectation was reinforced
by legends describing the blasphemous career of the first
great heretic, Simon Magus. It was known through the biblical Acts of the Apostles and other accounts of the ministry of
Peter and Paul in Rome that Simon Magus denounced the
apostles before Nero and tried to purchase the Holy Spirit to
strengthenhis magic (Acts 8:18-19).32Because he used money
to gain spiritual authority,he gave his name to the practice of
simony, a condition characterizingthe Churchin Hildegard's
day. According to legend, to prove his divinity, Simon tried to
fly up to heaven with the aid of demons, but, when cursed by
Simon Peter, he fell to his death.33
As the legend of Antichrist developed throughout the
Middle Ages, it was influenced by earlier events associated
with Simon Magus and other evil figures in salvation history
who prefigured the deceiver of the Last Days. Thus the
100
PLATE 1. Hildegard, Scivias, 3.11, Eibingen, MS 1, fol. 214v (copy of Wiesbaden, Hessisches Landesbibliothek,MS 1), Vision of the Last Days (photo:
after Scivias, CCCM43A, by permission of Brepols Publishers).
pseudo-ascension became a feature of Antichrist'slegendary
life and was illustrated in various contexts, including a drawing from Herrad'sHortus deliciarum (fol. 242v; Fig. 6). In
the top register of one of three folios picturing the life and
career of Antichrist, he is shown attempting to rise from the
Mount of Olives, where Michael, emerging from a cloud and
wielding a sword, strikes him down.34 This is the most common version of Antichrist's death. Hildegard offers a novel
variant: "And behold, there came suddenly a thunderbolt,
which struck that head with such great force that it fell from
the mountain and yielded up its spirit in death. And a reeking
cloud enveloped the whole mountain, which wrapped the
head in such filth that the people who stood by were thrown
into the greatest terror.And that cloud remained around the
mountain for a while longer" (493). Although McGinn states
that Hildegard is the first to claim that Antichrist will attempt
to rise to heaven in a parody of the life of Christ,35the notion
that Antichrist will go to the Mount of Olives in order to
ascend to heaven as did Christ but would instead be killed
had been suggested almost eight hundredyears earlier in Jerome's commentary on Daniel, which posited that Antichrist
would meet his end at the apex of the Mount of Olives.36Thus
Volmar and others among Hildegard'searliest audience who
were familiar with Jerome's exegesis may have been able to
identify the monstrous head with Antichrist and the mountain
with the Mount of Olives, even though the mountain is not
named either in Hildegard's account of her vision or in the
commentary.
In envisioning Antichrist in the form of a demonic head
integral to the body of the Church, Hildegard is at her most
original and radical. Caviness has referred to this image as
"the church invaded by Antichrist," and Newman has described Antichrist as assaulting Ecclesia.37It must be stressed
again, however, that Hildegard clearly sees evil coming from
within the Church. This is not an attack from without,
whether led by the traditionalAntichrist born of the Jews or
an Antichrist supportedby Islamic military power, as others
feared. By representingevil as internalto Ecclesia, Hildegard
conveys her vivid sense that the Church has grown corrupt,
especially from simony. This image may also suggest "her
midcentury disillusionment over the schism."38Whatever its
immediate source, the originality of Hildegard'sinsight that
Antichrist emerges from within the Church, should not be
underestimated.
The remainder of the vision conforms to a more traditional eschatology. After the head is destroyed by the thunderbolt,the terrifiedfollowers of Antichrist,depicted between
Ecclesia and the mountain, repent, saying: "O Almighty
God, have mercy on us! Let us return, let us return; let us
hasten to the covenant of Christ'sGospel; for ah! ah! ah! we
have been bitterly deceived!" (493-94). This passage represents the orthodox expectation developed by Jerome in his
commentary on Daniel that a brief period for the "refreshment of the saints" will follow the destruction of Antichrist
FIGURE6. Herrad of Hohenbourg, Hortusdeliciarum,formerly Strasbourg,
Bibliothhque municipale,fol. 242v, Antichrist's death and subsequent events
(photo: after Straub-Keller, Hortus deliciarum, 1879-99).
and precede Doomsday.39This refreshment, giving those deceived by Antichrist the opportunityto repent-to turn from
Antichrist's false religion to Christ's true Gospel-leads not
to a millennial kingdom but to a brief period of ecclesiastic
renewal, a period symbolized in the vision by the white feet
of the Youth and the Woman. This period of repentance is
visualized explicitly in the second register of the folio picturing the conclusion of Antichrist's life in Herrad'sHortus
deliciarum (Fig. 6). After Michael strikes down Antichrist in
the top register, his followers, including Jews and Christians,
are amazed, and some turn to the true Church, as represented
by the man in the second register holding a book. The lower
register shows the goal of the refreshmentof the saints: conversion and baptism.
The Voicefrom Heaven
Hildegard's claim in Scivias is that she not only simultaneously saw and heard divine secrets in visions, but that she
also heard a Voice from Heaven explicating her visions. The
101
biblical prophets provided a model for this claim: Daniel, for
example, received a heavenly explication of his enigmatic
vision of the beasts (Daniel 7:16-28). In the case of Hildegard's vision of the Last Days, the commentary she received
comprises forty-two discursive chapters (Scivias 3.11.1-42),
each transcribed in the Rupertsberg manuscript after the
miniature depicting the vision and after Hildegard'sdescription of what she saw.40 These chapters represent a dramatic
shift in content and tone. The mode of representation of the
vision is emphatically visual, innovative, and individualistic,
whereas that of their explication is verbal, traditional, and
conventional, conforming to patterns characteristic of contemporarymonastic exegesis. The change in mode results in
a corresponding shift in effect on the reader-viewer of the
Scivias manuscript. If we accept Hildegard'sbelief that both
the vision she sees and the voice she hears are divinely inspired revelations, then God is a more interesting artist than
exegete.
The forty-two chapters of commentary may be divided
into three categories based on purpose and subject matter.
Texts of the first type repeat and explain small sections of the
vision. After a short introduction, the Voice from Heaven
clarifies the literal meaning of each section and then usually
interprets the imagery as a prophecy of the future. It is explained, for example, that the five beasts represent five temporal ages (3.11.1).41 Although characterizedby evil, the fifth
age, the time of the "son of perdition" (3.11.6), will include
some who resist evil: "And then the children of light will be
pressed in the winepress of martyrdom; and they will not
deny the Son of God, but reject the son of perdition who tries
to do his will with the Devil's arts"(495)-an allusion to Antichrist'suse of supernaturalpowers to convert the unwary.42
This resistance, the Voice further explains, is the reason the
gray wolf's rope mixes white with black. Such visionary explication, serving both to clarify and to supplement the ambiguous imagery, typifies these chapters, which, for example,
explicitly identify the Youth as the Son of Man (3.11.9), the
shadow that covers him as a time of persecution (3.11.10),
and the Woman as the Bride of the Son of God (3.11.13). Of
the forty-two chapters recording the heavenly Voice, however, only eighteen-fewer than half-specifically explicate
portions of the visions.
The second type of text, represented by eight chapters,
comprises quotations from and commentaries on biblical
passages, drawing upon traditional monastic exegesis and
emphasizing tropological interpretations. Interestingly, the
Voice justifies the content of Hildegard'svision by citing the
apathy of the contemporary Church and the need to "speak
through a person who is not eloquent in the Scriptures or
taught by an earthly teacher" (3.11.18). This authorization
may have been needed in the commentaryboth because of the
disturbing nature of the Last Judgment vision-particularly
its image of Antichrist-and because, as McGinn notes, it
was more unusual for a woman in the Middle Ages to be an
102
exegete than a visionary or prophet.43Hildegard'spractice of
using scriptural exegesis to supplement her visions, therefore, is exceptional, whereas the content of the commentary
itself, which does not always relate directly to the images, is
generally conventional, homiletic, and often highly moralized. The moralizations can be quite extensive and take on a
life of their own. They areparticularlyconcerned with sexual
purity or deviance, which may explain the locus of evil in the
images of the Youth and Woman. If Hildegard'svision may
be designated mystical apocalypticism, her discussion of the
vision based on the Voice from Heaven may be labeled moralized apocalypticism.
Of particular relevance to an analysis of Hildegard's
knowledge of monastic eschatology and its influence on her
vision of the Last Days is the third type of text recordingthe
Voice from Heaven. The passages, digressions on key themes,
together form a compendium of traditional Antichrist lore.
Although not revealed in the vision itself, they add numerous
details regarding the Last Days and life of Antichrist. This
material draws on a monastic tradition best known from the
Libellus de Antichristo (ca. 950), compiled by Abbot Adso of
Montier-en-Der.44The Libellus greatly influenced later apocalyptic narratives, in part because Adso organized the disparate exegetical and legendary beliefs regarding Antichrist
into a coherent vita modeled on the well-established form of
the saint'slegend.45Altogether sixteen chaptersof Scivias develop specific features of the Antichrist legend. The longest
digression occurs after the Voice from Heaven explicates the
Woman'smonstrous genital head and bloody legs by describing the son of perdition, his persecutions, and the bloody suffering of the faithful (3.11.15-16). Then, before discussing
the next scene in the vision-the monstrous head breaking
away from the Woman (3.11.37) to rise up the mountainHildegard inserts several chapters summarizingboth popular
and theological accounts of the conception, deceits, and persecutions of Antichrist. It is here that the son of perdition is
finally named (3.11.19) and distinguished from the Son of
God: "For those who forerun and follow the son of perdition
whom you call Antichrist are in the way of error;but as for
you, follow the footsteps of Him Who taught you the way of
truth, when He appeared with humility and not with pride in
the world in the body" (499).
It is importantto rememberthat the extended explication
of Antichrist's life that now follows was not seen by Hildegard in her vision of the Last Days. Instead, it was received
from the heavenly Voice by way of explication of the vision
("Hear therefore and understand"[499]), and it is only at this
point that Hildegard introduces traditional lore concerning
Antichrist. These include his vile conception and childhood
(3.11.25), his pretenseto be Christ(3.11.26), his startlingmiracles (3.11.27, 29), his observance of Jewish ritual (3.11.30),
his pretended death and resurrection (3.11.31), and his persecution of the elect (3.11.32). Once again, sexual depravity
is emphasized, this time in the description of Antichrist's
mother: "She will separate herself from all people, so as to
conceal herself more easily; and then she will secretly engage
in vile fornication with men, though only a few, defiling herself with them with a great appetite for wicked doings, as if
her holy angel commanded her to do this deed of shame. And
in the burning heat of this fornication, she will conceive the
son of perdition without knowing which man's semen engendered him" (502). The evil, demonically inspired nature of
Antichrist's conception-exemplifying the mixture of folklore and exegesis in this popular apocalyptic legend-particularly worried monastic commentators and is therefore
stressed by the Voice from Heaven.46
Enoch and Elijah and the Salem Miniature
The most common expectation concerning Antichristoutlined in patristic exegesis and expanded in narrative and
dramatic accounts-is that Enoch and Elijah will return in
the Last Days to challenge the deceiver. The Voice from
Heaven develops this expectation at length when explaining
the monstrous head (3.11.33-36), even though Hildegard had
not seen the patriarchand prophet in vision. The commentary
also alluded to them relatively early when explicating the
white feet of the Youth and Woman (3.11.10-11, 16). According to an extensive exegetical tradition, Enoch and Elijah are
the Two Witnesses of Revelation 11, who will preach the true
Gospel of Christ for 1260 days and then be killed by the
Beast that rises from the Abyss.47 The Beast is identified as
Antichrist, who is particularlyenraged by Enoch and Elijah.
Recording the Voice of God, Hildegard states that their
preaching will be like a thunderboltchallenging Antichrist's
supernaturalpowers (3.11.35). Unable to withstand such a
doctrinal challenge, he will finally kill them (3.11.36): "But
by the consent of My will, Enoch and Elijah will at last be
killed by Antichrist; and then they will receive in Heaven the
reward of their labors" (506)-an allusion to their promised
resurrection (Rev. 11:12).
It is not surprising that the heavenly Voice's extended
digression on the life of Antichrist develops the legend of
Enoch and Elijah, given how common it was in literary,
artistic, and exegetical contexts. But what does this legend
have to do with Hildegard's vision, which does not include
the Two Witnesses? Nothing Hildegard had seen and described-as depicted in the Scivias miniature of the Last
Days (Fig. 1)-alludes to Enoch and Elijah. To put the question in terms of her mystical experience, how does what
Hildegard saw in vision relate to what she then heard about
the vision from the heavenly Voice? This is the crucial question to be addressed when analyzing the relationship between
image and word in Scivias and when considering Hildegard
as an apocalyptic visionary.
An answer to the question is suggested by comparingthe
Rupertsberg image to a miniature in another manuscript of
Scivias, produced at the Cistercian monastery of Salem ca.
1200 and now in Heidelberg (Fig. 7).48 It illustrates the same
vision of the Last Days as the miniature we have been examining, but with significant differences. For example, although
the five beasts are still portrayedin the upperleft corner symbolizing North, they now face in the same downward direction, explicitly denoting West. In this the Salem illustration
is closer to Hildegard's description of her vision than is the
Rupertsberg miniature (Fig. 1). Another difference is that
the Salem image depicts a musical instrument covering the
Youth's lap, a feature of the vision described by Hildegard
and interpretedby the commentary as the songs of those persecuted by Antichrist (3.11.9). The miniature also places the
Woman and the Youth next to each other in the upper right
corner, which may illustrate the commentary'sidentification
of the Youth as "Bridegroom of the Church"(3.11.9) and the
Woman as "Bride of the Son of God" (3.11.13). Significantly,
the Woman is now fully clothed, so that the blood on her legs
is not shown and the monstrous head is depicted as superimposed on her clothing, rather than as an integral part of
her body. This representation of the head as external to the
Woman may have been influenced by the commentary,which
tends to moderate the most disturbing aspects of the vision.
It, for example, treats Antichrist'spersecutions as external attacks and stresses that the Church "must endure assault, until
the coming of the two witnesses of Truth"(498). Another notable difference in design is the placement of the heavenly
thunderboltdirectly below the Youth, so that when it strikes
the monstrous head, it appears as an extension of the Youth's
power. This design may reflect how the thunderbolt is allegorized by the Voice from Heaven: "For God's power will
manifest itself and destroy the son of perdition, striking him
with such jealousy that he will fall violently from the height
of his presumption, in all the pride with which he stood
against God" (507).
The Salem miniature thus provides a careful illustration
of the Scivias text. In this illustrative function it differs from
its counterpartin the lost Rupertsberg manuscript, whichprobably based on Hildegard's sketches and designs-functions as an independent witness to the visionary experience.
The difference between the two manuscripts is stressed by
Caviness, who notes that the pictures in the Salem manuscript
seem "to have been created as 'illustration,'that is, their genesis was secondary to the text."49 I would add, too, another
significant distinction: at least in the Salem image of the Last
Days, the text illustrated is not only Hildegard's account of
her vision, but also the explication of it ascribed to the heavenly Voice.5soThis is particularly evident in the miniature's
lower left quadrant(Fig. 7), where two holy figures are depicted, their names-Enoch and Elijah-inscribed above
their heads. Thus the artist of the Salem miniature has responded to the text of the commentary by picturing what the
vision and the Rupertsbergminiature lacked: the expectation
that the Two Witnesses would preach in the Last Days. The
Salem miniature illustrates the commentary's emphasis on
103
cod. SalemX.16,fol. 177,
FIGURE7. Hildegard, Scivias, 3.11, Heidelberg, Universitditsbibliothek,
Vision of the Last Days (photo: Universitditsbibliothek,
Heidelberg).
their opposition to Antichrist (3.11.33-36) by showing Elijah
using his staff to poke the monstrous head. Furthermore,the
two biblical figures have taken the place of Antichrist'sduped
followers, whom the Rupertsbergimage pictures looking up
in amazement at the reeking cloud. The Salem design illustrates the commentary'spromise that Enoch and Elijah "will
terrify and cast out [Antichrist's]whole cohort with the thunderbolt of righteous doctrine, and so fortify the faithful"
(506). By focusing on the faithful witnesses ratherthan those
deceived by Antichrist and by showing the fallen head as
upside down and with eyes shut, the Salem miniaturedepicts
the ultimate victory of Ecclesia over Antichrist, a victory
stressed by the Voice from Heaven.
104
Since the role of the Two Witnesses is one of the most
commonly representedelements of the Antichrist legend, its
illustration in the Salem manuscript is traditional,just as its
absence from the Rupertsberg image is unusual. The Salem
miniature'straditionalism and dependence on the text of the
commentary highlights by contrast the originality and selfsufficiency of the Rupertsbergminiature. This independence
strengthensthe likelihood that it was designed by, or was immediately and thoroughly influenced by, Hildegard. Although
it was painted much later, when the Rupertsbergmanuscript
was produced, the miniature probably preserves authentic
elements of Hildegard's visionary experience that preceded
the lengthy explanations ascribed to the Voice from Heaven.
Thus comparing the Salem and Rupertsbergminiatureshelps
clarify the relationship between Hildegard's vision and the
commentary. Hildegard captured what she saw and heard in
vision only in part and by two means: first, in the original
designs that form the basis of the Rupertsberg miniature;
and second, in her verbal description of the vision recorded
in Scivias. The original designs do not depict elements discussed by the Voice from Heaven probably because the
commentary was added later to the visual and verbal representations of the vision to restrain their disturbing imagery
and explain their perplexing features. The commentary also
drew upon established monastic exegesis to incorporatestandard apocalyptic expectations into the original vision of the
Last Days, such as Enoch and Elijah's opposition to Antichrist, which provides assurance that at least some faithful
will remain steadfast in the Last Days. This is such a traditional feature of Christian eschatology that an image produced under the influence of the commentary, such as the
Salem miniature, would be expected to illustrate it. The differences between these two miniatures should remind us that,
when analyzing representations of the vision of the Last
Days, we need to recognize the experiential and temporal distinctions between Hildegard's original visionary experience,
her sketching of it, her description of it, and her recording of
the explication provided by the heavenly Voice.
Hildegard's Visionary Experience and the Rupertsberg
Frontispiece
The famous frontispiece to the RupertsbergScivias that
portrays Hildegard and Volmar (fol. 1; Fig. 8) and substantiates her claim for divine inspirationvisually represents and
underscores the importance of these experiential and temporal distinctions in her visionary experience. My discussion of
the frontispiece borrows terms from the philosophical analysis of Peter Moore, who, although he does not discuss Hildegard, outlines four elements of mystical experience that
can provide insight into her visions.51The first, which Moore
calls "raw experience,"is mystical experience unavailable for
analysis because it cannot be communicated by the mystic. In
the frontispiece this raw experience is picturedby the tongues
of fire licking Hildegard's head and touching her eyes. The
fire comes directly from heaven and recalls the flames of Pentecost. The apostle Peter's pentecostal sermon is relevant
here: "God says, 'This will happen in the last days: I will pour
out upon everyone a portion of my spirit; and your sons and
daughters shall prophesy. . .'" (Acts 2:16). This prophetic
moment is recalled by the Scivias image, which establishes
Hildegard as directly inspired by the Holy Spirit, a daughter
of God endowed with the gift of prophecy. Moreover, unlike
traditional illustrations of Pentecost, in which the tongues of
fire alight on the heads of all present-the disciples as a group
and often on the Virgin Mary as well-this image stresses that
Volmar, although a witness to Hildegard's visions, is not a
FIGURE 8. Hildegard, Scivias, Eibingen, MS 1, fol. 1 (copy of Wiesbaden,
Hessisches Landesbibliothek, MS 1), frontispiece, Hildegard and Volmar
(photo: after Scivias, CCCM43A, by permission of Brepols Publishers).
participantin the pentecostal gift. The raw experience of the
vision is divine in origin and Hildegard'salone.
Moore calls the second element of mystical experience
"incorporated interpretation."The mystic integrates prior
beliefs and experiences and known images and symbols into
received visions, thereby communicating-to the extent it is
possible-the original experience to others. In my view the
Scivias frontispiece seeks to represent this "incorporatedinterpretation"by depicting Hildegard as she sketches on the
wax tablets stacked on her lap. It is the first way in which she
records her visionary experience, an immediate interpretation
that incorporates the raw experience into a recognizable visual language based both on her previous visionary images
and on an inherited iconography. For Hildegard, these designs-which, as Caviness suggested,52she probably redrew
on parchment-are the primary record of her vision, which
she developed in her verbal account of the vision and expanded in her commentary.
Caviness has argued that, even while sketching on these
wax tablets, Hildegard "could have dictated part of the text
105
more or less simultaneously-as she shows herself dictating
to Volmar in this frontispiece."53Strictly speaking, the frontispiece does not show Volmar taking dictation, since he
holds a closed book, not a pen or a parchment sheet,54but
the miniature strongly suggests verbal communication, since
Volmar leans forward as if to hear words spoken. Although
the initial sketching precedes the dictation-Hildegard refers
in the past tense to what she "saw"-the two are closely related. It is reasonable to assume that after immediately and
quickly sketching the vision as she sees it, Hildegard would
next describe it to Volmar, who would make a record that
formed the basis of the verbal description in Scivias. It is importantto note, however, that although closely related, Hildegard's verbal dictation is distinct from her sketching and
forms a separate element of her visionary experience. It represents the third of Moore's four elements, "reflexive interpretation,"which includes interpretations "spontaneously
formulated either during the experience itself or immediately
afterwards."55It is crucial to distinguish this element in
Hildegard'swork, for just as her sketches cannot capture the
raw visionary experience, neither can her dictated description
capture verbally what she draws, even if she describes it
shortly after she sketches it. Thus the verbal description of
the vision is distinct from its visual representation,just as the
artistic image is distinct from the original vision.
Moore's fourth element of mystical experience is not
representedin the frontispiece, although it is implied by Volmar's prominence in the miniature and by what we know of
their collaboration. Moore names it "retrospective interpretation," and it includes doctrinal interpretations formulated
after-often very long after-the experience is over. The
forty-two chapters of Scivias that follow upon the image and
description of the vision of the Last Days and that record the
Voice from Heaven represent Hildegard's retrospective interpretation of her vision. They probably resulted from her
discussions with Volmar and her memory of her experience
contemplated within the context of monastic exegesis. In her
famous letter to Guibert of Gembloux, Hildegard notes the
importance of memory and its role in making her visions immediate and understandable:"WhateverI have seen or learnt
in this vision, I retain the memory of it for a long time, in
such a way that, because I have at some time seen and heard
it, I can remember it; and I see, hear and know simultaneously, and learn what I know as if in a moment."56The role
of memory in her retrospective interpretationof her vision
may explain the different tenses Hildegard uses in describing her vision and in recording the Voice. Whereas the description of the vision is in the past tense (e.g., "then I
looked" and "I saw again," 3.11), the Voice from Heaven
interprets the vision in the present (e.g., "And this is mystically signified by the vision you are seeing," 3.11.1) while it
is being recalled by Hildegard, perhaps as she looks at the
image of the vision she had sketched earlier. But memory
and explanation should not be confused with the visionary
106
experience itself. Scholars have tended to conflate this retrospective interpretationwith the vision, as if Hildegard had
her stunningly original visual experience and heard the heavenly Voice-with its extensive explanations,biblical exegesis,
moralprecepts,legendarydetails, and numerousdigressionsall at once. But surely this was not the case. Although an
importantpart of Hildegard'sresponse to her visionary experience, the commentary ascribed to the Voice from Heaven is
in my view far removed both temporally and experientially
from not only the raw experience of her vision, but also from
her picturing it in a sketch ("incorporated interpretation")
and describing it in words ("reflexive interpretation").
By invoking a supernaturalVoice, Hildegard can claim
prophetic inspiration for her explications as well as for her
visions. This is not an unusual move for the seer. In the introduction to her commentary on the Benedictine Rule, for
example, she writes: "And I, a poor little female in form, unlearned by human teaching, looked toward the true light and
to the memory of blessed Benedict as you requested, in order
that the matters in the teaching of the Rule which are more
difficult and obscure to human understanding might be revealed to me through the grace of God. And I heard a voice
from the true light saying to me . ."57This text did not originate in a divinely sent vision but was written at the request
of a Benedictine house about a decade after Hildegard
completed Scivias. Here and elsewhere in her vast corpus of
visionary, exegetical, and epistolary literature, the voice
(whether originating in Heaven or the lux vivens) signals
Hildegard's shift from an experiential to an explanatory
mode. It is for this reason that, as Joan Ferrantenotes, "There
are, in fact, times when it is virtually impossible to distinguish God's voice from Hildegard's."58
The traditional character of the material received from
the Voice from Heaven, dependent on monastic exegesis and
orthodox eschatology, reveals Hildegard's impressive command of monastic learning.59It may also suggest the learned
influence of Volmar and possibly others in her immediate
circle with whom Hildegard probably discussed her original
visionary experiences, sketches, and descriptions. To suggest
that Hildegard did not ruminate on her visions in a vacuum,
that she may have discussed them with colleagues whom she
trusted, does not denigrate her learning, raise doubts about
her authorship, or in any way minimize the control she
clearly wielded over her visionary works, which led her to
condemn anyone who dared change their final inscribed
form.60Ferrantehas described the relationship between Hildegard and her scribes as "one of authorto copyeditor,"61in
that Volmar and later scribes did not change the content of
her writings and dictations but only corrected their grammar.
Nevertheless, this concern with the inscribed form of her
visions and commentaries does not mean that, during the
decade it took to complete Scivias, Hildegard did not discuss
her visions and their meaning with trustedassociates, even as
she developed her sketches into the form that would become
the basis for the Rupertsberg manuscript'sminiatures. It is
true that, as Constant Mews states, "It is impossible to know
how far both Hildegard'sindividual ideas and the final structure of Scivias were worked out throughdiscussion with Volmar, who was certainly familiar with the contemporary
theological treatises and scriptural commentaries."62Nevertheless, I imagine that, at least occasionally, Volmar was the
ventriloquist for the Voice from Heaven.
Conclusion
This essay has focused on one of Hildegard's most
highly original visions to examine the complex relationship
between image and word in Scivias. The distinctions between
the vision, its visual representationand verbal description, on
the one hand, and its explication by the Voice from Heaven,
on the other, should not be elided but instead should be understood as representing different forms of visionary experience, forms that should be distinguished in temporal as well
as experiential terms. Moore's analysis of the four stages of
mystical experience provides one way to highlight the distinctions between the raw material of Hildegard'svision, her
incorporated interpretation of it as represented in the Rupertsberg image, her reflexive interpretationprovided by the
Scivias' verbal description of the vision, and her retrospective
interpretationreceived from the heavenly Voice and recorded
in the forty-two chapters of explication. The four stages of
Hildegard's visionary experience also help account for the
disjunction one feels in Scivias between the vision of the Last
Days and the commentary, between the freshness and startling power of the vision's imagery and the accompanying
mundane and unexceptional explication. The commentary
develops a more traditional form of monastic exegesis and
apocalypticism, as illustrated by the Salem depiction of the
Last Days.
This disjunction may help explain, furthermore, why
Hildegard's apocalypticism has been interpretedin such differing ways by scholars. For example, KathrynKerby-Fulton
terms it "radical"and calls Hildegard a "spiritual meliorist,"
whereas McGinn labels it "essentially conservative and pessimistic."63In my view Hildegard'sapocalypticism lies somewhere between these two extremes: I think Kerby-Fulton
overestimates Hildegard's millenarian tendencies, yet I agree
that the visions are potentially radical, as evident in the
Rupertsberg miniature. Hildegard's Antichrist and her apocalypticism in general are simultaneously radical and conservative, depending on whether we focus on the rich visual
depictions of her visionary experience or her extensive verbal explanations of it. Unfortunately for the later Middle
Ages, the Hildegard who became widely known was the
Hildegard of the verbal explanations, and then often only in
the condensed and sometimes domesticated form provided by
Gebeno of Eberbach'sPentachronon.64The daring and imaginative images of the Rupertsberg manuscript seem not to
have been copied. Fortunately for us, we have records of the
images as well as the explanations, but we should always be
clear which Hildegard we are examining when we discuss her
apocalypticism.
NOTES
*
This essay began as a paper read at a symposium on Hildegard held at
Rice University, November 20-21, 1998. I thank Honey Meconi for
inviting me to participate. I am grateful to Adam Cohen, Madeline
Caviness, Jeffrey Hamburger, and Elizabeth Sears for their insightful
critiques of this essay and their many helpful suggestions.
1.
Scivias, ed. A. Fiihrk6tter and A. Carlevaris, CCCM 43 and 43A
(Turnhout,1978); for Book 3, Vision 11, the vision of the Last Days,
CCCM 43A, 576-603. Along with Hildegard'sother writings, the text
is also available in Patrologia Latina, vol. 197. Since the CCCM and
PL editions of Scivias are readily available for those who wish to
check the Latin, this study will quote the translation by C. Hart and
J. Bishop, in Hildegard of Bingen, Scivias, Classics of Western Spirituality (New York, 1990), cited in the text by page number. Visions
are cited by book, vision, and section numbers.
2.
John van Engen disputes the medieval "grand founding myth" that
Bernardand Eugene authorizedHildegard'svisionary writings. See his
"Letters and the Public Persona of Hildegard,"in Hildegard von Bingen in ihrem historischen Umfeld: Internationaler wissenschaftlicher
Kongress zum 900jdhrigen Jubildum, 13.-19. September 1998, Bingen
am Rhein, ed. A. Haverkampand A. Reverschon (Mainz, 2000), 375418, esp. 379-91.
3.
P. Dronke, Women Writers of the Middle Ages: A Critical Study of
Textsfrom Perpetua (f203) to Marguerite Porete (f1310) (Cambridge,
1984), 144. For Hildegard'sthought see B. Newman, Sister of Wisdom:
St. Hildegard's Theology of the Feminine (Berkeley, 1989); S. Flanagan, Hildegard of Bingen, 1098-1179: A Visionary Life, 2nd ed. (New
York, 1998); Hildegard of Bingen: The Context of Her Thought and
Art, ed. C. Burnett and P. Dronke (London, 1998); and Voice of the
Living Light: Hildegard of Bingen and Her World, ed. B. Newman
(Berkeley, 1998). On Hildegard as prophet, see R. Emmerson, "The
Apocalypse in Medieval Culture,"in The Apocalypse in the Middle
Ages, ed. R. Emmerson and B. McGinn (Ithaca, NY, 1993), 298-99;
C. Mews, "Hildegard of Bingen: The Virgin, the Apocalypse, and the
Exegetical Tradition,"in Wisdom Which Encircles Circles: Papers on
Hildegard of Bingen, ed. A. Davidson (Kalamazoo, 1996), 27-42; and
M. Z611er, "Aufschein des Neuen im Alten: Das Buch Scivias der
Hildegard von Bingen im geistesgeschichtlichen Kontext des zw6lften
Jahrhunderts,"in Hildegard von Bingen in ihrem historischen Umfeld
(as n. 2), 273-76.
4.
For Hildegard's manuscripts, see M. Schrader and A. Fiihrk6tter, Die
Echtheit des Schrifttums der heiligen Hildegard von Bingen, Beihefte
zum Archiv ffir Kulturgeschichte, 6 (Cologne and Graz, 1956).
107
5.
6.
7.
The Eibingen color images are published in the CCCM edition. For
photographs of the originals, see L. Baillet, "Les miniatures du 'Scivias' de Sainte Hildegarde conserv6 'a la bibliothbque de Wiesbaden,"
Acadimie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres, Monuments et Mimoires
19 (1911), 49-149, pls. IV-XI. Madeline Caviness compares the copy
and the original image of the Last Days vision in "Gender Symbolism and Text Image Relationships: Hildegard of Bingen's Scivias," in
Translation Theory and Practice in the Middle Ages, ed. J. Beer
(Kalamazoo, 1997), 76, figs. 10, 11. Although the copy differs from
the original in a few details, I will use the copy because it provides a
reliable basis for analysis and its color and design visually entice us
into the world of Hildegard's visionary experience that the original
must have vividly depicted.
See the discussion in M. Caviness, "Hildegard as Designer of the Illustrations to Her Works,"in Hildegard of Bingen: Context (as n. 3),
29-30 and n. 7; K. Suzuki, "Zum Strukturproblemin den Visionsdarstellungen der Rupertsberger'Scivias'-Handschrift,"Sacris Erudiri 35
(1995), 232-33; and L. Saurma-Jeltsch,"Die Rupertsberger'Scivias'Handschrift: Uberlegungen zu ihrer Entstehung," in Hildegard von
Bingen: Prophetin durch die Zeiten, ed. E. Forster et al. (Freiburg i.
Br., 1997), 340-58. L. Saurma-Jeltsch, in Die Miniaturen im "Liber
Scivias" der Hildegard von Bingen: Die Wuchtder Vision und die Ordnung der Bilder (Wiesbaden, 1998), gathers numerous possible analogues for the manuscript'siconography and argues against Hildegard
as artist.
Schrader and Fiihrkitter, Die Echtheit des Schrifttums, 44, date the
manuscript ca. 1165, a dating followed by K. Suzuki, Bildgewordene
Visionen oder Visionserzdihlungen:Vergleichende Studie iiber die Visionsdarstellungen in der Rupertsberger "Scivias "-Handschrift und
im Luccheser "Liber divinorum operum"-Codex der Hildegard von
Bingen (Bern, 1998), 23-24, 256-70. In two recent studies A. Derolez
dates the manuscript somewhat later: 1170-79, based on paleographical evidence ("Neue Beobachtungen zu den Handschriftender visioniiren Werke Hildegards von Bingen," in Hildegard von Bingen in ihrem
historischen Umfeld, as n. 2, esp. table I), and 1175-80, based on the
manuscript's chapter headings ("The Manuscript Transmission of
Hildegard of Bingen's Writings: The State of the Problem,"in Hildegard of Bingen: Context, as n. 3, 17-28). KatrinGraf, in "Les portraits
d'auteurde Hildegarde de Bingen: Une etude iconographique,"Scriptorium 55 (2001), 179, suggests 1165-90. Saurma-Jeltsch(Die Miniaturen im "Liber Scivias, ") stands apartin dating the manuscriptas late
as the 1190s, after Hildegard'sdeath. Caviness-who dates the Scivias
images 1160-75-in a recent review ("Hildegardof Bingen: Some Recent Books," Speculum 77 [2002], 115-16) questions Saurma-Jeltsch's
methodology and casts doubt on her conclusions. For the difficulties of
dating the images, see K. Niehr's review of the books by SaurmaJeltsch and Suzuki in Zeitschriftfiir deutsches Altertum und deutsche
Literatur 129 (2000), 215-22, esp. 221-22.
8.
M. Caviness, "Artist:'To See, Hear, and Know All at Once',"in Voice
of the Living Light (as n. 3), 115.
9.
M. Caviness, "Anchoress, Abbess, and Queen: Donors and Patrons or
Intercessors and Matrons?" in The Cultural Patronage of Medieval
Women,ed. J. McCash (Athens, Georgia, 1996), 115. Caviness posits
that the color and design of some miniatures-particularly the nonfigural elements-suggest that Hildegard may have received some
visions while suffering from migraines. Caviness adds that the examples she cites "are not meant to imply that Hildegard's visions can
be reduced to one kind of physiological state, and certainly not to a
'pathological' cause" ("Gender Symbolism;' 87). For this possibility,
see C. Singer, "The Visions of Hildegard of Bingen," From Magic to
Science: Essays on the Scientific Twilight (London, 1928), 199-239.
108
10. A. Obermeier and R. Kennison, "The Privileging of Visio over Voxin
the Mystical Experiences of Hildegard of Bingen and Joan of Arc,"
Mystics Quarterly 23 (1997), 137-67.
11. Trans. Dronke, Women Writers, 168. See Letter 103R, ed. L. van
Acker, in Hildegardis Bingensis Epistolarium, CCCM 91A (Turnhout,
1993), 262.
12. See Godfrey and Theodoric's Vita sanctae Hildegardis, ed. Dronke, in
WomenWriters,232; for a translation see Dronke, 145. On Hildegard's
relations with Volmar, see J. Ferrante, "Scribe quae vides et audis:
Hildegard, Her Language, and Her Secretaries,"in The Tongue of the
Fathers: Gender and Ideology in Twelfth-CenturyLatin, ed. D. Townsend and A. Taylor (Philadelphia, 1998), 112-14.
13. B. McGinn, "'To the Scandal of Men, Women are Prophesying':
Female Seers of the High Middle Ages," in Waiting in Fearful Hope:
Approaching a New Millennium, ed. C. Kleinhenz and E LeMoine
(Madison, 1999), 77.
14. For the medieval Antichrist tradition, see R. Emmerson,Antichrist in
the Middle Ages: A Study of Medieval Apocalypticism,Art, and Literature (Seattle, 1981); B. McGinn, Antichrist: TwoThousandYearsof the
Human Fascination with Evil (San Francisco, 1994), esp. chs. 4 and 5;
and R. Rusconi, "Antichristand Antichrists,"in The Encyclopedia of
Apocalypticism, vol. 2, Apocalypticism in Western History and Culture, ed. B. McGinn (New York, 1998), 287-325. The most detailed
study of Hildegard'sAntichrist is H. Rauh, Das Bild des Antichrist im
Mittelalter: Von Tyconiuszum deutschen Symbolismus, 2nd ed., Beitrilge zur Geschichte der Philosophie und Theologie des Mittelalters,
Texte und Untersuchungen, N. F 9 (MUnster, 1979), 474-527.
15. For a contemporaryversion of this symbolism, see Hugh of St. Victor,
De archa Noe: Libellus de formatione arche, 11; CCCM 176 (Turnhout, 2001), 157. According to Ezekiel 38:6, 15, Northis also the home
of Gog and Magog, who in medieval apocalyptic belief represent the
armies of Antichrist; see Emmerson, Antichrist, 84-88.
16. Caviness, "Hildegard as Designer," 36. In placing North to the left,
Hildegard follows a convention used in medieval world maps, which
treat North as left (sinistra) of East, thus furtherassociating it with the
sinister. See D. Woodward, "Medieval Mappaemundi,"in The History
of Cartography,vol. 1, Cartography in Prehistoric, Ancient, and Medieval Europe and the Mediterranean, ed. J. B. Harley and D. Woodward (Chicago, 1987), 337.
17. See Hugh of St. Victor, Libellus deformatione arche, 11; CCCM 176,
157. For the association of the West with the Last Judgmentin medieval art, see P. K. Klein, "The Apocalypse in Medieval Art,"in Apocalypse in the Middle Ages (as n. 3), 165. According to Daniel's vision of
the time of the end, the apocalyptic "he goat" arises from the west
(Daniel 8:5).
18. Jerome, Commentariorumin Danielem libri III (IV), 2.7.2-28, CCSL
75A (Turnhout, 1964), 838-50. On the symbolic beasts and other
agents of evil, see Emmerson, "Apocalypse in Medieval Culture,"32028. For an eleventh-century illustration of such beasts, see the Roda
Bible (Paris, BNF, MS lat. 6, vol. III, fol. 66); reproducedin W. Cahn,
Romanesque Bible Illumination (Ithaca, NY, 1982), 75, fig. 46.
19. McGinn, "To the Scandal of Men," 83-84.
20. Jesus associated himself with the cornerstone in Matthew 21:42. On
this exegetical tradition, see G. Ladner, "The Symbolism of the Biblical Corner Stone in the Mediaeval West,"Mediaeval Studies 4 (1942),
43-60.
21. The Eibingen copy depicts a walled city (perhapsthe New Jerusalem?)
in place of the harp, which can be dimly seen in the original image.
See Saurma-Jeltsch,Die Miniaturen im "Liber Scivias," 196, fig. 97.
22. Ibid., 96-103.
23.
24.
25.
Traditionalexegesis also associates the Apocalyptic Woman with the
Virgin Mary, as evident in Hildegard's sequence, "O virga ac diadema"; see Symphonia armonie celestium revelationum, ed. and trans.
B. Newman (Ithaca, NY, 1988), 128-31. For the Woman, see E. Vetter, "Mulier amicta sole und Mater Salvatoris,"Miinchener Jahrbuch
der bildenden Kunst 9/10 (1958/59), 32-71.
For Beatus manuscripts,see J. Williams, The IllustratedBeatus: A Corpus of the Illustrations of the Commentaryon the Apocalypse, I- (London, 1994-); and R. Emmersonand S. Lewis, "Census and Bibliography
of Medieval Manuscripts Containing Apocalypse Illustrations, ca.
800-1500," pt. I, Traditio40 (1984), 347-79. For Anglo-French Apocalypses, see S. Lewis, Reading Images: Narrative Discourse and Reception in the Thirteenth-CenturyIlluminated Apocalypse (New York,
1995); and Emmerson and Lewis, "Census,"pt. II, Traditio41 (1985),
370-409.
Wolfenbtittel, Herzog August Bibl., Guelf. 1. Gud. lat. 2, fol. 14v. This
Franco-Flemish manuscript, a copy of the original manuscript,now in
Ghent, was produced ca. 1150-70. See the facsimile, Lamberti S. Audomari canonici, Liber floridus, ed. A. Derolez (Ghent, 1968); and
Emmerson and Lewis, "Census,"pt. III, Traditio 42 (1986), 457-60.
For a color reproduction of this folio, see Frederick van der Meer,
Apocalypse: Visionsfrom the Book of Revelation in WesternArt (New
York, 1978), 128.
26.
On the polemical tradition,in which symbols of evil representcontemporary political or religious threats to the Church, see McGinn, Antichrist, 143-72.
27.
Herrad of Hohenbourg, Hortus deliciarum, ed. R. Green, M. Evans,
C. Bischoff, and M. Curschmann, 2 vols. (London, 1979), which includes a color reproductionof the ApocalypticWoman (II, 454, pl. 151).
The manuscript was transcribedand traced in the 1830s by A. Comte
de Bastard, whose papers are now Paris, BNF, MSS nouv. acq. fr.
6044, 6045, 6083. See Emmerson and Lewis, "Census,"pt. III, 470-72.
28.
The miniature is accompanied by a text based on the Speculum ecclesie (Hortus deliciarum, ed. Green et al., II, 458-59). It identifies the
Woman as the Church, the Dragon as the Devil, its seven heads as the
seven deadly sins, and the Beast as Antichrist. For exegetical interpretations of these apocalyptic symbols, see Emmerson, Antichrist,
21-33.
29.
It might also suggest, as Caviness pointed out to me, menstruation,
which in the Middle Ages was regarded as polluting. On such attitudes
see M. Caviness, "Patron or Matron? A Capetian Bride and a Vade
Mecum for Her Marriage Bed," Speculum 68 (1993), 347 and n. 73.
30.
The serial use of different colors may also signal temporal movement,
as it does in depictions of the large statue in Nebuchadnezzar'sdream
(Daniel 2:31-45), where colored metals mark the empires symbolized
by the beasts of Daniel 7. For an illustration from ca. 1000, see
Bamberg, Staatsbibliothek, MS Bibl. 22, fol. 31v; color repr. in Die
Bamberger Apokalypse, ed. G. Suckale-Redlefsen and B. Schemmel
(Lucerne, 2000), II, fig. 9. For discussion see H. Mayr-Harting, Ottonian Book Illumination: An Historical Study, rev. ed. (London, 1999),
II, 34-35, fig. 24; and Saurma-Jeltsch,Die Miniaturen im "Liber Scivias," 75, 198, fig. 42.
31.
G. Schtissler notes that medieval exegesis often called Antichrist the
"caput iniquitatis," a possible source for the head; see Studien zur
Ikonographie des Antichrist (Dissertation, Ruprecht-Karl-Universitiit
zu Heidelberg, 1975), 119 n.1. For Antichrist in medieval art, see Emmerson, Antichrist, 108-45; B. McGinn, "PortrayingAntichrist in the
Middle Ages," in The Use and Abuse of Eschatology in the Middle
Ages, ed. W. Verbeke, D. Verhelst, and A. Welkenhuysen, Mediaevalia
Lovaniensia, I/15 (Leuven, 1988), 1-48; and R. Wright,Art and Antichrist in Medieval Europe (Manchester, 1995).
32.
On this tradition in exegesis, art, and literature, see Emmerson, Antichrist, 26-31, 122-24; and R. Emmerson and R. Herzman, The Apocalyptic Imagination in Medieval Literature (Philadelphia, 1992), 2830, 114-25, and figs. 3, 6, 7.
33.
In the Stammheim Missal (Los Angeles, J. Paul Getty Museum, MS
64; ca. 1170), an initial D introducing the feast of Peter and Paul (fol.
138v) pictures Simon Magus in the arms of two demons rising above
a tower. See E. Teviotdale, The Stammheim Missal (Los Angeles,
2001), fig. 15.
34.
An accompanying text (fol. 243v) explains: "Antichristus enim, post
incomparabilemquam exercet tyrannidem,ascendet in montem Oliveti
fingens se ascensurum in celum in eodem loco in quo Dominus ascendit. In eadem hora veniet Michahel archangelus jussu Domini et interficiet eum, et destrueturillustratione adventus Christi" (ed. Green et
al., II, 410).
35. McGinn, Antichrist, 132.
36.
Commentariorum in Danielem libri III (IV), 4.11.44-45, 933-34;
trans. G. L. Archer, Jr., Jerome's Commentaryon Daniel (Grand Rapids, 1958), 142: "Then he shall come up to the summit thereof, that is
of the mountainousprovince, or the apex of the Mount of Olives, which
of course is called famous because our Lord and Savior ascended from
it to the Father.And no one shall be able to assist the Antichrist as the
Lord vents his fury upon him. Our school of thought insists that Antichrist is going to perish in that spot from which the Lord ascended to
heaven."
37.
Caviness, "Artist,"117. See also Newman, Sister of Wisdom, 243, and
the caption for fig. 13: "Virgin Ecclesia assaulted by Antichrist" (244).
Although similarly stressing the violence of the scene, McGinn's account more closely describes the effect of the imagery, since Antichrist
originates in Ecclesia: "Antichristis a sexual criminal, one whose very
birth from his typological mother, the Church, is so violent and
bloody.., .that it can be seen as a kind of reverse rape" (Antichrist,
131).
38.
K. Kerby-Fulton, "Prophetand Reformer: 'Smoke in the Vineyard',"in
Voice of the Living Light, 77; she cites C. Czarski, "The Prophecies of
St. Hildegard of Bingen" (Dissertation, University of Kentucky, 1983).
I am reluctant to link Hildegard's visionary experience so closely to
contemporary events, especially since it is impossible to date this vision with any precision. For example, if Hildegard experienced it early
in her career-say shortly after her prophetic call in 1141-it would
precede her concern with the schism, but would explain her initial reluctance to report her visions. On the other hand, it seems unlikely that
Pope Eugene and the Trier commission would have approved such
criticism aimed directly at the Church;it is thus possible that, coming
late in Scivias, the vision may not have been recorded in 1148, when
Hildegard, according to tradition, was authorized to continue writing
Scivias.
39.
On this expectation, see R. Lerner, "Refreshment of the Saints: The
Time After Antichrist as a Station for Earthly Progress in Medieval
Thought,"Traditio32 (1976), 97-144.
40.
It is this extensive body of commentary that led E. Benz (Die Vision:
Erfahrungsformen und Bilderwelt [Stuttgart, 1969], 152) to classify
Hildegard as a didactic visionary. Along with her even more extensive
discussions of the Last Days in Liber divinorum operum, 3.5 (ed. A.
Derolez and P. Dronke, CCCM 92 [Turnhout, 1996], 405-63), this
commentary is the basis for most scholarly analyses of Hildegard's
apocalypticism. For a comparative study, see S. Gouguenheim, La sibylle du Rhin: Hildegarde de Bingen, abbesse et prophitesse rhinane
(Paris, 1996), 97-124.
41.
Dronke (Liber divinorum operum, introduction, lxxx) thinks the
beasts symbolize five types of contemporaneous evil kingdoms before
109
Antichrist; however, I agree with Rauh (Bild des Antichrist im Mittelalter, 508) that they symbolize successive kingdoms leading up to
Antichrist, the "son of perdition." For Hildegard's beasts, see Gouguenheim, Sibylle du Rhin, 102-9.
42.
See Emmerson, Antichrist, 91-94.
43.
McGinn, "Hildegard as Visionary and Exegete," in Hildegard von Bingen in ihrem historischen Umfeld (as n. 2), 350. McGinn calculates
that exegesis comprises about 16% of the chapters in Scivias; see "Ratio and Visio: Reflections on Joachim of Fiore's Place in TwelfthCentury Theology," in Gioacchino da Fiore tra Bernardo di Clairvaux
e Innocenzo III. Atti del 5' Congresso internazionale di studi gioachimiti, ed. R. Rusconi (Rome, 2001), 46 n. 74.
44.
45.
Adso Dervensis, De ortu et tempore Antichristi, ed. D. Verhelst,
CCCM 45 (Turnhout, 1976); trans. B. McGinn, Apocalyptic Spirituality (New York, 1979), 81-96. For analysis, see R. Konrad,De ortu
et tempore Antichristi: Antichristvorstellung und Geschichtsbild des
Abtes Adso von Montier-en-Der (Kallmiinz, 1964); and Emmerson,
Antichrist, 74-107. Adso's influence on contemporarymonastic eschatology is particularlyevident in Herrad of Hohenbourg'sHortus deliciarum, fols. 243r-v, ed. Green et al., 409-10.
See R. Emmerson, "Antichristas Anti-Saint: The Significance of Abbot
Adso's 'Libellus de Antichristo,"' American Benedictine Review 30
(1979), 81-96.
46.
In his Libellus de Antichristo, Adso argues that Antichrist's mother
does not conceive Antichrist with a devil, although her womb is later
possessed by a devil. The Jour du Jugement, a fourteenth-centuryplay
staging a full life of Antichrist, develops a more popular account of his
demonic conception rooted in folklore. See Antichrist and Doomsday:
The Middle French Jour du Jugement, trans. R. Emmerson and D. Hult
(Asheville, NC, 1998).
47.
On this expectation see Emmerson, Antichrist, 95-101.
48.
Heidelberg, Universititsbibliothek, cod. Salem X.16, fol. 177. The Salem manuscript includes ten miniatures; see A. von Ochelhiuser, Die
Miniaturen der Universitiits-bibliothek zu Heidelberg (Heidelberg,
1887), I, 75-107, pls. 11-17. For this manuscriptsee also Schraderand
Fiihrkitter, Echtheit des Schrifttums, 46; Scivias, ed. Ftihrktitterand
Carlevaris, I, xxxix-xlii; and W. Werner, Die mittelalterlichen nichtliturgischen Handschriften des Zisterzienserklosters Salem, Kataloge
der Universititsbibliothek Heidelberg, 5 (Wiesbaden, 2000), 314-16.
49.
Caviness, "Artist,"113.
50.
Although she did not discuss the Antichrist image, C. Kessler showed
that the images she studied in the Salem manuscript are based on the
commentary ascribed to the heavenly Voice; see "A Problematic Illumination of the Heidelberg Liber Scivias," Marsyas 8 (1957/59), 10.
51.
110
P. Moore, "Mystical Experience, Mystical Doctrine, Mystical Technique," in Mysticism and Philosophical Analysis, ed. S. Katz (New
York, 1978), 108-9. On the frontispiece and other portraitsof Hildegard, see Graf, "Portraitsd'auteur"(as n. 7), 179-96.
52. Caviness, "Artist,"115.
53. Ibid.. The distinction between Hildegard and Volmar is stressed again
in the Salem manuscript portrait. See von Ochelhiiuser, Miniaturen
der Universitdits-bibliothekzu Heidelberg, pl. 13; and P. Dronke, "Hildegard'sInventions: Aspects of Her Language and Imagery,"in Hildegard von Bingen in ihrem historischen Umfeld (as n. 3), 315 and color
pls. IV, V.
54. A point made by A. Derolez, "Deux notes concernant Hildegarde de
Bingen," Scriptorium 27 (1973), 292.
55. Moore, "Mystical Experience," 108.
56. Trans. Dronke, Women Writers, 168; see Letter 103R, Epistolarium,
ed. Van Acker, II, 261-62. See also A. C. Bartlett, "MiraculousLiteracy and Textual Communities in Hildegard of Bingen's Scivias," Mystics Quarterly 18 (1992), 45-49; and Ferrante, "Scribe quae vides et
audis," 108-12.
57. Trans. H. Feiss, Explanation of the Rule of Benedict (Toronto, 1990),
18; for the Latin, PL 197, 1055. See also G. Constable, "Hildegard's
Explanation of the Rule of St. Benedict," in Hildegard von Bingen in
ihrem historischen Umfeld (as n. 3), 163-87.
58. Ferrante,"Scribe quae vides et audis," 104.
59.
Analysis of Hildegard'scomplex eschatology-both in Scivias andLiber
divinorum operum-clarifies the depth of Hildegard's learning and
reading. I therefore disagree with Goughenheim, Sibylle du Rhin, 57,
who discounts Hildegard'slearning as superficial. On Hildegard'sreading, including classical, philosophical, and patristic texts, see A. Carlevaris, "Ildegardae la patristica"'in Hildegard of Bingen: Context (as
n. 3), 65-80; Dronke, "Problemata Hildegardiana,"107-17; and Ferrante, "Scribe quae vides et audis," 105-8.
60.
See Ferrante,"Scribe quae vides et audis'" 105, 131 n. 8.
61. Ibid., 103.
62.
C. Mews, "Religious Thinker: 'A Frail Human Being' on Fiery Life,"
in Voice of the Living Light (as n. 3), 57.
63.
See Kerby-Fulton, "Prophet and Reformer,"73; and McGinn, "Apocalypticism and Church Reform," in Encyclopedia of Apocalypticism
(as n. 14), II, 83. More recently McGinn has noted that Hildegard's
visions "were accepted as confirming, enriching, and elucidating traditional monastic theology, especially in the key areas of cosmology,
anthropology, salvation history, and eschatology" ("Hildegardas Visionary and Exegete," 332).
64.
For Gebeno's fashioning of Hildegard as apocalyptic prophetin the tradition of John the Revelator, see C. Meier, "Nostris temporibusnecessaria: Wege und Stationen der mittelalterlichen Hildegard-Rezeption,"
in Architectura poetica: Festschrift fiir Johannes Rathofer zum 65.
Geburtstag, ed. U. Ernst and B. Sowinski (Cologne, 1990), 307-26.